Editorial: How fracking could impact West Coast

West Coast environmental groups and energy companies should pay very close attention to fracking protocols that have just been adopted for oil and gas drilling in Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia, and creation of an oversight organization to certify energy operations that follow the rules.

It may not turn out to be the best approach to this looming issue. Some environmentalists are criticizing the new arrangement as simply a way for the energy companies to avoid government regulation of the process of hydraulic fracturing, more commonly known as fracking.

Even so, California environmental groups would be wise to join into or even initiate similar negotiations with companies that are scouting for known fuel supplies trapped underground. Voluntary agreements with the energy industry could prove more environmentally friendly than government regulation. And even if that is not the case, the effort would not have been wasted because it likely would provide a new pool of information for the public.

Stirring rather severe public consternation, the federal government recently auctioned off additional drilling rights in the so-called Monterey Shale, 1,750 square miles running from inland Monterey County to Southern California and containing the majority of the nation's shale reserves.

Under pressure from environmental groups, the state Department of Conservation is working on new rules intended to protect ground water and other resources from the relatively new technology that promises to create a California oil boom.

Much smaller shale oil deposits have created new wealth in North Dakota and Texas, but critics allege the fracking technique has created environmental nightmares farther east.

Though environmental groups in California have demonstrated serious political strength, leaving such significant issues up to the state bureaucracy seems iffy at best. Energy companies are generous campaign contributors and, as we all know, money often trumps common sense, especially in Sacramento and Washington.

So, even while working with the state to create strong and workable rules, advocacy groups should attempt to work with the oil companies to see if they can reach an agreement similar to, or stronger than, the one announced last week in Pennsylvania.

The agreement creates 15 standards meant to protect air and water quality while minimizing the release of global warming gases. The topics include methane emissions, burning of unwanted gas, groundwater monitoring, improved well designs, wastewater disposal, seismic monitoring and use of less toxic fluids in the fracking process.

Signing on to the agreement were Shell, Chevron, the Environmental Defense Fund, the Clean Air Task Force, Pennsylvania Environmental Council, Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future, EQT Corp., Consol Energy, the William Penn Foundation and the Heinz Endowments. The oil companies involved say none of them could meet all 15 standards at the moment.

The program will be administered by a board representing environmental groups, industry and the general public. Among the members are former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and former EPA chief Christine Todd Whitman.

Already, this structure is being eyed by regulators and environmental groups in Illinois, and Pennsylvania representatives have recommended it to their counterparts in North Dakota and Texas. In California, state officials should continue their regulatory effort in earnest, but there doesn't seem to be any good reason for other interested parties to see what they can work out on their own in the meantime.